Free E-book and one of the 'essential reads' when it comes to the UFO subject -whatever your position.

This is Edward J. Ruppelt's memoir of his role in the seminal US Air Force UFO study projects: Projects Sign, Grudge and Blue Book. According
to this account, he coined the acronym 'UFO' and put many of the official procedures for reporting and studying UFOs in place. An enjoyable read, this
book captures the feel of working for the mid-20th century US military. He describes the changing attitudes of the USAF about UFOs during the early
1950s: wobbling between denial, ridicule, paranoia, and genuine inquiry.

A key point of this book is to resolve doubts about the military's role. Ruppelt makes a strong case that UFOs weren't a top secret weapons system;
the reports were not disinformation by intelligence agencies; nor was there a concerted effort to cover up UFOs by the US government. Ruppelt does
recount many times when the brass tried to dismiss reports without investigating them sufficiently. However, this comes across as simply
standard-issue military 'cover-your-ass' behavior, not a vast conspiracy.

He gives unique details on some of the most impressive sightings on his watch. These were largely witnessed by highly trained observers such as radar
operators, fighter and commercial pilots, astronomers, and other scientists, often during the course of their official duties. The Air Force group
that Ruppelt worked for had access to data on top secret balloon launches and test flights, so they were able to sort out which reports could be
explained in this way. He consulted with a wide range of scientific specialists, many of whom were in favor of the extraterrestrial hypothesis, and
some who were skeptics.

Fully a quarter of the reports were still unexplained after this rigorous filtering. Ruppelt is decidedly agnostic, but open-minded, about the reality
behind the 'unexplained' sightings.

Some of the more interesting statements made by Captain Edward J Ruppelt throughout his career:

"Of these UFO reports,the radar/visual reports are the most convincing.
When a ground radar picks up a UFO target and a ground observer sees a light where the radar target is located,then a jet interceptor is scrambled to
intercept the UFO and the pilot also sees the lights and gets a radar lock only to have the UFO almost impudently outdistance him,there is no simple
answer."
Captain Edward J Ruppelt - Chief of Project Bluebook.

After the Fort Monmouth, NJ, radar sightings (which started on Sept 10, 1951), the Air Force held a meeting at the Pentagon. General Cabell presided
over the meeting, and it was attended by his entire staff plus Lieutenant Cummings, Lieutenant Colonel Rosengarten, and a special representative from
Republic Aircraft Corporation. The man from Republic supposedly represented a group of top U.S. industrialists and scientists who thought that there
should be a lot more sensible answers coming from the Air Force regarding UFOs. "Every word of the two-hour meeting was recorded on a wire recorder. The recording was so hot that it was later destroyed, but not before I had
heard it several times......it didn't exactly follow the tone of the official Air Force releases--many of the people present at the meeting weren't as
convinced that the 'hoax, hallucination, and misidentification' answer was quite as positive as the Grudge Report and subsequent press releases made
out."
Captain Edward J Ruppelt - Chief of Project Bluebook.

"Every time I get skeptical, I think of the other reports made by experienced pilots and radar operators, scientists, and other people who know what
they are looking at. These reports were thoroughly investigated and they are still unknowns.
We have no aircraft on this earth that can at will so handily outdistance our latest jets... The pilots, radar specialists, generals, industrialists,
scientists, and the man on the street who have told me, I wouldn't have believed it either if I hadn't seen it myself, knew what they were talking
about. Maybe the Earth is being visited by interplanetary space ships.
When four college professors, a geologist, a chemist, a physicist, and a petroleum engineer report seeing the same UFOs on fourteen different
occasions, the event can be classified as, at least, unusual. Add the fact that hundreds of other people saw these UFOs and that they were
photographed, and the story gets even better. Add a few more facts, that these UFOs were picked up on radar and that a few people got a close look at
one of them, and the story begins to convince even the most ardent skeptic."
Captain Edward J. Ruppelt
Chief of Project Blue Book, from his book, The Report on Unidentified Flying Objects, 1956.

"The one thing about these briefings that never failed to amaze me, although it happened time and time again, was the interest in UFOs within
scientific circles. As soon as the word spread that Project Blue Book was giving official briefings to groups with the proper security clearances, we
had no trouble in getting scientists to swap free advice for a briefing. I might add that we briefed only groups who were engaged in government work
and who had the proper security clearances solely because we could discuss any government project that might be of help to us in pinning down the UFO.
Our briefings weren't just squeezed in either; in many instances we would arrive at a place to find that a whole day had been set aside to talk about
UFOs. And never once did I meet anyone who laughed off the whole subject of flying saucers even though publicly these same people had jovially
sloughed off the press with answers of 'hallucinations,' 'absurd', or 'a waste of time and money.' They weren't wild-eyed fans but they were certainly
interested."
Captain Edward J Ruppelt - Chief of Project Bluebook.

"...and it was up to them to tell us if they (UFOs) were real---some type of vehicle flying through our atmosphere. If they were real,then they would
have to be spacecraft because no one at the meeting gave a second thought to the possibility that the UFOs might be a super secret U.S. aircraft or a
Soviet development. The scientists knew everything that was going on in the U.S. and they knew that no country in the world had developed their
technology far enough to build such a craft that would perform as the UFOs were reported to do."
Captain Edward J Ruppelt - Chief of Project Bluebook.

This was one of the first books published about the UFO phenomena. We are fortunate that it ended up in the public domain.

It is a template for much of what would follow: the paranoia, the government disinformation, the inescapable conclusion that the saucers are not of
this earth. Keyhoe, with his spare, matter of fact writing style, which also conveys a profound sense of wonder, has to be the prototype for the
deadpan Fox Mulder of the X-Files.

On one hand we can see the birth of a key modern mythology. On the other, there is a body of almost naive evidence in this text unpolluted by that
very mythology. The case studies are real. The witnesses were highly reliable. These cases are still unexplained.

There doesn't seem to be that many good E-books out there on the UFO subject but did find this interesting one from 1957:

Inside Saucer Post 3-0 Blue by Leonard Stringfield 1957

Leonard Stringfield was born in 1920. He was director of CRIFO (Civilian Research, Interplanetary Flying Objects) - one of the world's largest
research groups during the mid-5Os and publisher of its newsletter, ORBIT (1953-1957). He also worked in cooperation with the United States Air Force
(1953-1957), investigating and reporting UFO activity, having been assigned a special code number to report by phone to the Air Defense Command in
Columbus, Ohio.

For over 30 years Stringfield served in several of the major UFO Organizations in a public relations capacity. From 1957 to 1970, he was public
relations adviser with the National Investigations Committee on Aerial Phenomena. Later on it was director of public relations and board member of the
Mutual UFO Network. He was also regional investigator for the Center for UFO Studies directed by Dr. J. Allen Hynek.

Stringfield was also advisor to Sir Eric Gairy, former Prime Minister of Grenada, 1977-78, during his efforts to establish a UFO research agency
within the framework of the United Nations. He passed away in 1994.

UFOLOGY A Major Breakthrough in the Scientific Understanding of Unidentified Flying Objects - James M. McCampbell

Very few subjects have attracted as much attention throughout the world as Unidentified Flying Objects. Nearly everyone in the civilized world has at
least heard of them. Even some natives beyond the reach of modern communications have described things in the sky that fit the definition. Beyond
that, however, there is little unanimity. Every individual has naturally formed his own opinion on the topic, and beliefs vary greatly. Most
reasonable people would accept a full and convincing proof of the identity of these mysterious objects. UFOs remain controversial, however, because no
attempt at explaining the phenomenon has been entirely successful.

A synthesis is presented of data concerning Unidentified Flying Objects (UFOs) reported during the past 20 years through governmental, press and
private channels. The serious evidence is clarified and analyzed. The data are reported by categories of specially trained observers and studied by
patterns of appearance, performance and periodic recurrence.

During the process of selecting the most reliable and significant reports, emphasis was placed on the qualifications of the observer and on cases
involving two or more observers. This resulted in 740 reports being selected, after consideration of over 5000 signed reports and many hundreds of
reports from newspapers and other publications.

An overall look is taken at the UFO problem: The historical development of the mystery, Congressional attitudes and activity, consideration of the
problems and dangers involved, and discussion of what is needed in the way of organized scientific research.

Over two decades ago, eminent scientist Vallee wrote a provocative book about alleged UFO landings, folklore, and certain unexplained phenomena. That
long-out-of-print book which discussed the most interesting reports of more than 1,000 apparently reliable witnesses has become an underground
classic.

The book as said was written in 1956 and Ruppelt said the following at the end.

Maybe the final proven answer will be that all of the UFO's that have been reported are merely misidentified known objects.

Or maybe the many pilots, radar specialists, generals, industrialists, scientists, and the man on the street who have told me, "I wouldn't have
believed it either if I hadn't seen it myself," knew what they were talking about. Maybe the earth is being visited by interplanetary spaceships.

Only time will tell.

We now live in 2010 and that list he had obviously already back then with the many pilots, radar specialists, generals, industrialists, scientists,
and the man on the street, is since then extended to gigantic proportions.

So which possibility would be in my opinion therefore the most logical and therefore the final proven answer?

100% and without a doubt the second one.

I wish I could manipulate time so I could read them all in just one day.

This other Charles Fort book from 1923 also has some really intriguing UFO reports - the writing style is dated but it does seem that UFOs were being
seen way back before the 1940's.

New Lands by Charles Fort

As in his other books, many of the phenomena here are straight-on UFO reports. Fort gives numerous instances of 'airship' sightings, some with
multiple attestations over wide regions. Many of the sightings occurred decades before humans attained heavier-than-air flight. What is striking to
modern readers is the language used by the authorities to explain these sightings: bright stars, luminescent gas, mirages, ball lightning, and mass
hysteria...and, just prior to WWI, reports of mysterious cylinders over south England were attributed to the Germans. So not only have there been
mysterious lights in the sky long before the initial UFO flap in the late 1940s, the powers that be have likewise attempted to dismiss these reports
in similar terms for a long time..

Hi Isaac, thanks for the reply -as it states below, it was suspected at the time that Captain Ruppelt caved in to pressure from the USAF and was
forced to alter the conclusions to his own book -after reading some of the seemingly contradictory statements he made whilst actively working at
Bluebook (found in the second post of this thread) do you think this is a viable proposition?

Also you mention that he updated the book 'in light of further information' -can you describe the nature of this information as the period between
his 'reversal of opinion' was initialy only three years -there does seem to be some confusion as the new book 'revision' was released in quite an
unusual way with the date publication omitted so the foreword made the new edition appear to be the original.

The book was cleared by the Air Force, though there were reports that some intriguing material was censored. In her master's thesis, Diana
Palmer Hoyt writes that "Michael Swords inspected the original draft of Ruppelt's manuscript and discovered that Ruppelt's published account of the
material contained in the Estimate of the Situation left out significant documentation proving that UFOs were of extraterrestrial origin. Swords
concludes that the Air Force censored Ruppelt's published account."

In 1958, Ruppelt announced that he would release an expanded edition of his book, arguing that all UFOs had mundane explanations. Keyhoe and others
would suggest that Ruppelt had caved into Air Force pressure to change his opinions on UFOs.

1960 the expanded edition (three more chapters) was published (Doubleday & Co., New York). In an unusual manner, the date of the publication was
omitted. The book, with the 1956 copyright note and the 1955 date of Ruppelt's Foreword made the book appear to be the original
edition.

Hi Isaac, thanks for the reply -as it states below, it was suspected at the time that Captain Ruppelt caved in to pressure from the USAF and was
forced to alter the conclusions to his own book

Yes, that has been alleged in various UFO books - without much (if any) evidence in suport.

-after reading some of the seemingly contradictory statements he made whilst actively working at Bluebook (found in the second post of this thread) do
you think this is a viable proposition?

Some of the apparent inconsistencies are quite difficult to understand, whether you subscribe to a conspiracy theory or not.

Perhaps he simply adopted one angle (fairly pro-UFO) when writing the first book since this is the best marketing angle, but felt a bit guilty later
or felt he was being misportrayed?

Or (as some authors have suggested) he may have simply been fed up with the lack of progress and/or contactees making wild claims (e.g. Adamski). The
latter are discussed at some length in his newer edition.

(As you probably know, some researchers have suggested that some of the wilder claims were made by Government disinformation agents, to discredit
other reports - again, without a great deal of supporting evidence).

Also you mention that he updated the book 'in light of further information' -can you describe the nature of this information as the period between
his 'reversal of opinion' was initialy only three years

This is rather complicated...

The short answer is that he refers to further information in the new chapters.

A longer answer would involve considering some of the apparent inconsistencies between:
(a) Ruppelt's various statements, and also
(b) inconsistencies between those statements and the contents of documents/correspondence in his possession.

I mentioned some material relating to just one of these explanations, relating to the Lubbock Lights, in a
post HERE.

Originally posted by IsaacKoi
Ruppelt wrote an enlarged book a few years later, updating it in the light of further information.
The new version, with three new chapters at the end (Chapters 18, 19, 20) basically reaches a skeptical conclusion.
Quite a few UFO websites contain copies of, or quote from, the original version of the book.
You will hear less about the revised edition...
The revised edition (published in 1959 or 1960) can in fact be found online, e.g. at:

I download it and did take a fast look at it and found this remark of Ruppelt quite interesting.
And of course as Former Head of the Air Force Project Blue Book Ruppelt must deny it all, even until his death in 1960.

He said in the book of your link the following.

Then there's Project MOONWATCH, the Optical Satellite Tracking
Program for the International Geophysical Year.

Dr. J. Allen Hynek, the director of MOONWATCH wrote to me: "I can quite safely say that we have no record of ever having received from our MOONWATCH
teams any reports of sightings of unidentified objects which had any characteristics different from those of an orbiting satellite, a slow meteor, or
of a suspected plane mistaken for a satellite."

Dr. Hynek should know. He has investigated and analyzed more UFO reports than any other scientist in the world.

And the third convincing point is that twelve years have passed since the first UFO report was made and still there is not one shred of material
evidence of anything unknown and no photos of anything other than meaningless blobs of light.

What was Operation Moonwatch.

Operation Moonwatch (also known as Project Moonwatch and, more simply, as Moonwatch) was an amateur science program formally initiated by the
Smithsonian Astrophysical Observatory (SAO) in 1956 [1].

The SAO organized Moonwatch as part of the International Geophysical Year (IGY) which was probably the largest single scientific undertaking in
history. Its initial goal was to enlist the aid of amateur astronomers and other citizens who would help professional scientists spot the first
artificial satellites.

However, until professionally-manned optical tracking stations came on-line in 1958, this network of amateur scientists and other interested citizens
played a critical role in providing crucial information regarding the world’s first satellites.

So what Dr. J. Allen Hynek said back then to Ruppelt was when Hynek himself was an outright 'debunker,' who did taking great joy in cracking what
seemed at first to be puzzling.

It’s from, THE ROOTS OF COMPLACENCY by Dr. J. Allen Hynek

The Boomerang and the Holocaust are but striking samples of what happens when the collective mind willfully disregards evidence when "it can't
take it".

The entire modern UFO syndrome is another: here we have utterly ample evidence of the global nature of the UFO phenomenon.

Thousands of instances and over many countries the evidence for the UFO phenomenon is clear, but those in position of policy and authority (FAA,
educators, scientists etc) are deaf or purposely obtuse. Apathy goes hand in hand with the ability to accept even the most inane answers, anything
whatever, just to stave off the necessity to think.

So we cannot at the moment expect to do little about the wealth of material collected on the Westchester Boomerang (or for the much more abundant
wealth of UFO material).

The circuits are closed; apathy holds sway. But history has shown that in time the information and questions dam breaks, sometimes cataclysmically,
and later, why, low and behold, the pundits by a complete irrational turn of fact, will say, "oh, we knew this all the time!".

As evidence of how the many years Dr. J. Allen Hynek studied the UFO topic eventually changed his thinking, here are some of his quotes taken from
various sources:

Hynek quote from "The UFO Experience"

"Before I began my association with the air force, I had joined my scientific colleagues in many a hearty guffaw at the "psychological postwar
craze" for flying saucers that seemed to be sweeping the country and at the naivete and gullibility of our fellow human beings who were being taken
in by such obvious "nonsense." It was almost in a sense of sport that I accepted the invitation to have a look at the flying saucer
reports....."

"I had started out as an outright 'debunker,' taking great joy in cracking what seemed at first to be puzzling cases. I was the arch enemy of those
'flying saucer groups and enthusiasts' who very dearly wanted UFOs to be interplanetary. My own knowledge of those groups came almost entirely from
what I heard from Blue Book personnel; they were all "crackpots and visionaries.'"

"The UFO Cover-Up." (Fireside books, Simon & Schuster 1984),
two years before his death

"Experienced UFO investigators have, over the years, been the recipients of many tales and undocumented statements, generally from former
military pilots and crew members about having their aircraft "scrambled" (launched in immediate response to an alarm) to pursue a UFO, of UFOs
encroaching on high-sensitivity areas on
military bases, of malfunctions of defense equipment in the presence of UFOs, of planes lost while pursuing UFOs, and, yes, even tales of crashed
saucers and of alien beings kept in the deep freeze." ......

"Now, however, documentation which puts the UFO- U.S. government controversy in quite a new light has become available. The authors have made
revealing use of documents released through the mechanism of the Freedom of Information Act and other data which have been made
available to them, often through private sources, which show that the CIA and NSA protestations of innocence and lack of interest in UFOs are nothing
short of prevarication."

"The reader must judge for himself or herself just how far these implications extend, but certainly no one can deny any longer that various
intelligence agencies of our government were long cognizant of UFOs and the global extent of this phenomenon. Official dispatches from our
embassies and air bases in other countries to these agencies, to the State Department, and even, on occasion, to the White House, bear
incontrovertible witness to this."

"For the government to continue to maintain that UFOs are nonexistent in the face of the documents already released and of other cogent evidence
presented in this book is puerile and in a sense an insult to the American people."

This content community relies on user-generated content from our member contributors. The opinions of our members are not those of site ownership who maintains strict editorial agnosticism and simply provides a collaborative venue for free expression.